Okay,I'm confused ,because the thread title is evidence that is incompatable with an accident theory ,so aren't we supposed to be discussing why we think it's not an accident,not that it was? :waitasec:
Yes of course it is MJ. But with discussion about why it isn't an accident comes discussion of why it could be.
That was not the point of my post at all and I am sorry if I confused you.
LOL if you think about it, no one is suggesting it IS an accident but we have a thread about why it isn't one anyway.
But those that think it might be one aren't suggesting it from a legal aspect but more of a practical angle.